What was the original motivation for the formation, behaviour and conduct of the armed group, and for using armed force (rather than pursuing other means)?

In terms of founding motivations, armed groups generally fall into three categories: they can be reactionary (reacting to some situation, or something that members of the groups experienced or with which they identify); they can be opportunistic , meaning that they seized on a political or economic opportunity to enhance their own power or positions; or they founded to further ideological objectives.

The motivations underlying the formation and activities of the armed group may in some cases be carried over into the armed group's negotiating strategy. Knowing more about these driving motivations can help humanitarian negotiators prepare for negotiation and anticipate the choices and decisions that the armed group may make prior to, during or following negotiations.

What are the current motivations of the armed group?

It may be possible to identify current motivations of the group from statements / interviews by the group's leader(s) or representatives. The group's motivations and objectives may have changed over time. Humanitarian negotiators should not assume that the group's stated motivations are shared among all group members.

What is the organizational and leadership structure of the armed group? Does it have a single leader; a group of leaders; changing membership?

The organization's leadership structure has implications for the ability to secure commitment and implementation from the leadership to any agreed outcome of negotiations. Is the structure of the armed group hierarchical or fl at? Armed groups with several layers in their organizational structure may require that proposals developed during negotiations be elevated through successive levels for a decision. The stability of the leadership (have there been recent changes in leadership?) will also have implications for the sustainability and implementation of any agreed outcome of negotiations.

What is the power structure of the armed group? Are there coalitions and alliances between and within groups?

Identifying the locus of power within the armed group will assist in identifying the appropriate interlocutors with whom to negotiate, and the extent to which the armed group interlocutors can ‘deliver' on their commitments.

What is the level of autonomy among regional/local sub-commanders? Is there a regional command structure, or is it cell-like?

If regional- or local-level field commanders of the armed group act with high levels of autonomy, these commanders may decide not to honor the outcome agreed with the group's leadership, or may indeed seek to negotiate further for local implementation. Humanitarian negotiators may need to enter into these additional local-level negotiations to ensure local implementation.

Just as humanitarian negotiators are guided by core principles (see Section 3.2), so too will armed groups be guided to some degree by their own principles of action.

The principles of action of armed groups will most likely be very different from the humanitarian principles guiding humanitarian actors: armed groups may be guided by principles of guerrilla warfare; religious, ideological, political or cultural principles; or purely economic objectives. For example, the Lord's Resistance Army (LRA) armed group operating in Northern Uganda is guided by the vision of the group's leader, Joseph Kony, to establish a government based on the biblical Ten Commandments.

Humanitarian negotiators don't have to agree with the principles of action of the armed group, but learning more about, and understanding, these guiding principles can improve the likelihood of a successful negotiation.

What are the group's interests… in general, and in the context of a specific negotiation?

To learn more about the interests of an armed group, humanitarian negotiators should, first and foremost, ask! Too often, humanitarian negotiators enter the interaction with pre-conceived notions of the group's interests.

At the same time, humanitarian negotiators need to be aware of the potential for armed groups to misstate their interests as part of their negotiation strategy. In all cases, time invested in preparing for the negotiations will enhance understanding of the group's interests.

In humanitarian negotiations, the interests of the armed group and the interests of the humanitarian organization may in some cases be divergent.

For example, the humanitarian organization's interests include alleviating human suffering; the armed group's interests may center on defeating an adversary, expanding control of territory, which may cause civilian suffering.

Nevertheless, humanitarian negotiators should seek to highlight areas of shared interest where they exist , and should seek to influence the armed group's interests in situations where the respective interests diverge, through persuasive negotiation based on principles of humanitarian action and international law (See Section 3.3).¹⁵

Does the armed group claim a legitimate constituency?

Armed groups may profess to act on behalf of a particular group (e.g. ethnic group, tribe), when in many cases the group has no basis for claiming a mandate from the purported constituents.

Humanitarian negotiators should be aware of the potential for the armed group to use the process of negotiations as a means of exerting further control over their stated constituency. Humanitarian negotiators should therefore establish and maintain separate lines of communication with bona fide community and civil society leaders from within the population that may be under the control of the armed group (e.g. tribal elders; women's committees; religious leaders).

What are the needs of the armed groups?

Needs are not the same as interests. An armed group may express an interest in achieving a certain outcome, but it will also have organizational, resource and identity-related needs to satisfy throughout the negotiation process and beyond. In some cases, these needs may be reduced to the needs of the person negotiating on behalf of the armed group. Is he/she using the negotiations purely to bolster his/her position within the organization?

Humanitarian negotiators must be attuned to the potential for the existential or functional needs (e.g. financial needs) of the armed group to influence the negotiation strategy of the group.

Are there certain cultural, religious or ethnic characteristics of the armed group that may influence the armed group's strategy/approach?

Humanitarian negotiators should consider how cultural, religious or ethnic characteristics of an armed group might influence the group's strategy, commitment to implementation and/or conduct.

In this regard, knowledge of the local culture and the population from which the armed group is drawn can be invaluable. There may be traditional ‘warrior' or ‘hunter' identifications with being a member of an armed group, or the group may state that it is acting legitimately in accordance with the religious beliefs/traditions of its members.

What is the extent of control exerted by the armed group over a given population or territory?

Armed groups may claim more extensive control over populations or territories than is actually the case. In the case of negotiations related to protection of civilians in a particular area or delivery of assistance to a particular population group, humanitarian negotiators should attempt to assess the actual level of control exerted by the armed group prior to entering into negotiations.

Once again, humanitarian negotiators must make it clear to their counterparts during the negotiations that any discussion of de facto population/territorial control does not represent recognition or legitimization of that authority.